Interesting comments on Conservative vs Liberal Anglicans over the schism issue over homosexuality:
BBC NEWS | UK | Anglican rift: Conservative v Liberal
What really strikes me is the conservative view expressed - that it's not about homosexuality, it's simply about sex outside of marriage:
Which begs the question - what is marriage?
It seems most people presume that marriage has been unchanging, but the tax signing ceremony we have now has nothing to do with marriage in at least the times contemporary with Jesus.
For example, in Roman life, you were believed married simply by living with someone. You could also opt for a ceremony in front of friends to express regards, but ultimately, there was no signing of documents.
You can see this in the modern Christian wedding ceremony - the ring, carrying over the threshold, etc, are Roman in origin - but even in a modern Christian wedding you are not regarded as married until you sign a civil document stating that you are married.
In other words, the wedding ceremony that defined marriage in Roman times no longer defines marriage in modern times.
So what constitutes marriage has apparently changed quite significantly - it is no longer a declaration before family, friend and even God - but instead, the process of signing a civil document, nothing more.
In which case, has the interpretation of marriage according to scripture failed to keep with the changes?
After all, if people living together in the time of the first Christians was regarded as marriage, why is it that two people living together nowadays are not regarded as married by Christians?
Something for discussion if you will...
BBC NEWS | UK | Anglican rift: Conservative v Liberal
What really strikes me is the conservative view expressed - that it's not about homosexuality, it's simply about sex outside of marriage:
The Bible is clear that sex is a gift from God and is intended for a life-long committed relationship of marriage between a man and a woman. Any sex outside marriage, whether heterosexual or homosexual is therefore against God's plan for his children and his will.
Which begs the question - what is marriage?
It seems most people presume that marriage has been unchanging, but the tax signing ceremony we have now has nothing to do with marriage in at least the times contemporary with Jesus.
For example, in Roman life, you were believed married simply by living with someone. You could also opt for a ceremony in front of friends to express regards, but ultimately, there was no signing of documents.
You can see this in the modern Christian wedding ceremony - the ring, carrying over the threshold, etc, are Roman in origin - but even in a modern Christian wedding you are not regarded as married until you sign a civil document stating that you are married.
In other words, the wedding ceremony that defined marriage in Roman times no longer defines marriage in modern times.
So what constitutes marriage has apparently changed quite significantly - it is no longer a declaration before family, friend and even God - but instead, the process of signing a civil document, nothing more.
In which case, has the interpretation of marriage according to scripture failed to keep with the changes?
After all, if people living together in the time of the first Christians was regarded as marriage, why is it that two people living together nowadays are not regarded as married by Christians?
Something for discussion if you will...